Commonwealth Soldiers

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by phil37, Feb 13, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Yes

    16 vote(s)
  2. No

    24 vote(s)
  3. Not bothered

    4 vote(s)
  1. With compulsory redundancies on their way, should commonwealth soldiers be reduced first?
  2. Er no. That's a wee bit racist.
  3. They joined with the same false promises we did. If anyone's going to be binned it should be a decision based on the last few SJARs and/or personal conduct.

  4. What he said. Can't out them because they're darker than us, they signed the same papers and swore the same oath.

    Plus the Scots regiment would then consist of three officers, a SNCO and a PTI, so thats out.
  5. However if there are cuts to be made I have an inkling that our Nepalese cousins should be looking nervously over their shoulders.

    Old JoLum may have helped the veterans but she has made them a target for cost cutting.
  6. Why should they be first to go? They do the same job as the rest of us and face the same risks.

    I may be a bit biased as I'm effectively in the same boat as them but on the other side of the world.
  7. Soldier_Why

    Soldier_Why LE Moderator

    Actually has she not made it just as costly to get rid of them?
  8. Individually, yes. As a Bn etc, she has made them just as costly to keep.
  9. If you had to cut someone would it be a regiment of Brits who would add to the dole queue and remember the fact at the next re-election or a regiment who (mostly) will go back to their own country and cant vote?

  10. More costly actually. MoD has to fund the flights back to Nepal for RnR, and if the Sultan of Brunei decides he doesn't want to fork out the running costs of a Bn there then things look dodgy for the Brigade.
    In fighting for the benefit of the veterans she may have unwittingly foreshortened the Brigades lifespan.
  11. A hell of a lot more costly to run than just that. Average requirement for MQ's of a normal inf Bn is around 25% of the personnel. For the Gurkhas around 85-90%, then the allowances, the flights back to Nepal or the UK as they get the choice. Then add in the 12 months in trg, the English lessons and the recruiting costs (all of which we do not give to our Commonwealth brethren, we expect them to make their way over for selection and then the same trg as us already able to speak English) and the Gurkha's have priced themselves out of value for money.
  12. What he says.
    Plus, an anacronism in this age of real or imagined discrimination awareness, legal actions and resentment.

    What is probably keeping the Gurkhas intact when other regiments disappear is public opinion plus opinions of establishment people with clout.

    Possibly the solution for MOD will be the Nepalese Government stopping recruiting, perhaps with some subtle encouragement from HMG. Cue for MOD and HMG for much hand-wringing and crocodile tears but will provide a solution that will avoid too much venom being directed at the government of the day.
  13. Egged on by the fragrant JoLum they went for short term gain. In the long run many Nepalese will miss out on opportunities due to what looks like greed.

    When they joined up they knew their T & C didn't give equal pay and settlement rights.
  14. RP578

    RP578 LE Book Reviewer

    Hmm. Nepal has about 6 different Communist parties all of whom have at some stage have pledged to end foreign recruitment. At least three of those parties have held power; Marxist-Leninist, United Marxist-Leninist and Maoist, and yet recruitment has continued.

    The biggest hurdle for any Nepalese government in this matter (as with so many others) is that they have to avoid upsetting India, who can make life very difficult indeed. Whilst a huge amount (majority?) of recruits to the "Gorkha Brigade" come from Nepalese families domiciled in India, recruitment from Nepal still exists.